Abstract
The QGS program is software for highly reproducible evaluation of perfusion in cardiac muscles and cardiac functions, but basic data collection and processing conditions affect the output values of cardiac function analyses. Because these conditions have not been sufficiently evaluated, we determined in this study the optimum cut off, data collection time, and R-R fractions by comparing the outputs calculated from data obtained with a phantom using QGS with the phantom volume. The optimum cut off was 0.41-0.55 cycle/cm in 8 R-R fractions and 0.41-0.52 cycle/cm in 16 R-R fractions. The values calculated using QGS were underestimated by 11.4% compared with the phantom volume. With longer data collection times, statistical errors were smaller. Errors of data collection in 8 fractions over a period of 20 min were about the same as those in 16 fractions over a period of more than 25 min. Comparison between 8 fractions and 16 fractions in EF levels of patients demonstrated that errors were significantly smaller by 3% in 8 fractions than in 16 fractions, and the level was closer to E/G in 16 fractions than in 8 fractions.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
